What do liberals want the US to be?

[Steinlight]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

 

[Dad2three]

And you want ME to agree that Clinton AND Dubya were at fault for the subprime bubble that happened under Dubya 'late 2004 extending into 2007' (according to Dubya's working group), BUT on NAFTA, Ronnie and Poppy are in the clear? lol


Will you EVER accept, for ANY reason that like the 1920', 1980's (S&L) AND 2000's it was CONSERVATIVES AND THEIR POLICIES AT FAULT? Was G/S 'repeal' as you call it, a 'neo liberal' or liberal position or one coming primarily from the GOPers and conservative side?

No one said, they were in the clear, whatever the hell that means. What I am saying, is the ultimate responsibility for NAFTA lies on Clinton as he signed it. What are you saying, NAFTA was ok for Clinton to sign because Reagan and Bush supported it as well? You aren't making a coherent argument.

Bush wasn't a conservative, and you don't understand what neo-liberalism is. It is an ideology that transcends party. Dont attack me because you are stupid and don't know what it is.
neoliberalism political and social science Encyclopedia Britannica

I get it Bubba, I just think it's strange you call Clinton a neo liberal, when Reagan AND BOTH BUSHES were.lol


I don't think you are stupid Bubba, dishonest and a POS, yes, stupid. Nah

They all were neo-liberals. But you still haven't explained. Is Clinton correct for supporting free trade because Bush and Reagan did? You still haven't explained this rationale.

IF you remember (AND HONEST) LIBERALS were against 'free trade', and like Iraq war (Dubya's war of choice), 60% of Dems in Congress have voted against EVERY 'free trade agreement since NAFTA!

Yes, BJ Bill was, BY FAR THE BEST conservative Prez since Ike.

EDIT. Looks like Obama will come in second place!

Free trade is a Liberal concept.
Economic liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Traditional Conservatives like Buchanan have opposed free trade and have done so since the days of Hamilton in our Burkean Conservative tradition.

A Democrat President signed it into law. 50% of Democrats voted for NAFTA in the Senate. 73% of Republicans in the Senate voted for it. 40% of Democrats in the House voted for it. 76% of Republicans in the House opposed it. This idea that 60% of Democrats in the Congress opposed it is false.

I wish you would get your terminology right Bubba

You Birchers AREN'T conservatives, you are bigoted, right wing nut jobs

Economic liberalism

Economic liberalism is often associated with support for free markets and private ownership of capital goods, and is usually contrasted with similar ideologies such as social liberalism and social democracy, which generally favor alternative forms of capitalism such as welfare capitalism, state capitalism or mixed economies. Economic liberalism also contrasts with protectionism because of its support for free trade and open markets. Historically, economic liberalism arose in response to mercantilism and feudalism. Today, economic liberalism is also generally considered to be opposed to non-capitalist economic orders, such as socialism, market socialism and planned economies


Economic liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


You REALLY should have your hoodie on in your pic Bubba

 

[Wyatt earp]

Keep on complaining , do as little as possible and yes, Virginia your Company will move to. liberals are a Strange bunch they think a job is just to earn a paycheck

 

[Dad2three]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

 

[Dad2three]

Milton Keynes? lol

Yeah, it was the 'excess' of unions who had already been shrinking by the 1980's before Ronnie declared war on them!


NOT that it was the auto manufactures fault for resting on their laurels, lol


History has shown us that having more people able to afford the necessities of life IMPROVES the economy.

The period of greatest wage equality between workers and management was also the period where this nation boomed, seeing unparalleled growth for ALL classes (yes, even for the very rich). In fact, the rich did better under policies that they are crying about now then they do under so-called job-creator policies

Union membership declined during the late 50s and 60s, when there was the greatest period of wage equality.

Yeah, when dummy's like you, figured there was no need for unions anymore, then your conservative 'think tanks' came in and wiped them out! Amazing how many vote against their own best interests, we see it all the time in the poor, uneducated south, voting GOP and not backing unions, the morons!

What, I thought Reagan destroyed unions, now it is dumb southerners fault? How come income rose through the 50s into the 70s when union membership declined?

Yes, there are no need for unions that are explicitly hostile to the American worker and support foreign labor.
SEIU - Service Employees International Union - immigration

These unions need to be liquidated and put in the control of patriotic Americans.

I get it Bubba, WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol

IF you were EVER honest and got off your Birch bullshit I might have a heart attack. Bet you think Uncle Walter was the reason the US lost in Vietnam too right? That gawdamn red right?

You admit they are primarily hispanic race based and wonder why Americans don't join them? Seriously? Why would any non-hispanic native born worker support a union that wants to bring in more immigrants just because they are hispanic?

Same with the AFL-CIO, both support amnesty. The AFL was originally a pro-American organization that opposed immigration to protect American jobs. Now they have sold out.
American Federation of Labor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You mean unions support a path to citizenship? Shocking you Birchers hate it


Nov 20, 2014 - Breaking: Americans support a path to citizenship. About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

 

[Steinlight]

Wow, that is one crazy tangent. You have a special mind to somehow connect the excess of American unions in the 1980s to Milton Keynes and Libertarianism. I want some of the meds you are taking.

Milton Keynes? lol

Yeah, it was the 'excess' of unions who had already been shrinking by the 1980's before Ronnie declared war on them!


NOT that it was the auto manufactures fault for resting on their laurels, lol


History has shown us that having more people able to afford the necessities of life IMPROVES the economy.

The period of greatest wage equality between workers and management was also the period where this nation boomed, seeing unparalleled growth for ALL classes (yes, even for the very rich). In fact, the rich did better under policies that they are crying about now then they do under so-called job-creator policies

John Keynes, it was a typo, it is interesting how you attack a typo considering your freakish post format with several typos and random caps. Anyways, the point stands,trying to connect criticism of American organized labor in the latter half of the 20th century to Keynes or Libertarianism is absurd. Union membership has been on the decline since the late 50s because workers have recognize their inherent corruption and inability to address their needs.
http://doughenwood.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/union-density1.jpg

Your defense of union corruption shows that you have no sense of history and have never held a job in an industry with union trades. I could refer you to anecdotal examples from myself in my friends in the construction trade, where union construction workers for example wouldn't move dry wall or wire upstairs because that was the movers job, so they would sit their all day and nothing would get done while we would wait for the mover. For example, with auto manufacturers, UAW didn't even allow companies to build different carlines in the same plant. That doesn't show up in salaries, but it does in higher costs. So it wasn't just about high union wages, it was about inefficiency and costs.

MORE right wing bullshit. Shocking

The guy attacking unions, who like ANYTHING has good and bad, is fine will Mittens paying 14% taxes on $20 million income right? But it's the guy making $50-$60 grand that's the problem, NOT the CEO's who BARGAINED with the unions, lol

UNIONS created the conditions for jobs to go overseas right? Those construction jobs? Bet you have them in China today right? lol

Instead of being envious of union benefits, more people should organize or join one. The waning of the middle class coincides with corporate and right-wing attacks on unions.

You are the only bullshitter, and clearly have never held a job affiliated with unions in any way, you are just a partisan hack. It is ideological hacks like you who destroyed the unions. Shifting them form organizations focused on workers interests to bloated bureaucracies based on liberal political ideology. One of the strongest examples of this is union leadership today supporting amnesty, despite middle class americans opposing it. And you wonder why no one wants a part of them? They don't represent their interests and put social liberalism before the interests of their members.

You equate everyone who points out union corruption in the US to a Romney supporter or a supporter of corporate excess. I oppose corporate and union corruption. With that attitude, it is no wonder union membership continues to decline. You can't conceive that a growing number of people are represented by either party, and are sick of Democrats and Republicans, particularly white working class people.

Unions certainly contributed. Honestly, you are so thick, I was giving a person example, along with the UAW example, to show union inefficiency. You have no response, so you create a strawman.

Talk about strawman, lol

Actually WAS union for 11 years Bubba, CWA...Yeah, it's 'union corruption'.lol

The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Than you are dishonest, if you can't recognize the corruption in unions, and thus their failure in retaining membership lies, I don't know what to tell you.

The same model has applied with unions. Wealth have been transferred from union members to union leadership. If you can't recognize that both unions and corporations have gone down the same path, than I don't know what to tell you.
Scores of union leaders earn six-figure salaries Center for Public Integrity

 

[Dad2three]

Keep on complaining , do as little as possible and yes, Virginia your Company will move to. liberals are a Strange bunch they think a job is just to earn a paycheck

Instead of being envious of union benefits, more people should organize or join one. The waning of the middle class coincides with corporate and right-wing attacks on unions.

The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.


Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of Federal Revenue

1955 . . . 27.3%
2010 . . . 8.9%

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of GDP

1955 . . . 4.3%
2010 . . . 1.3%

Individual Income/Payrolls as a Percentage of Federal Revenue

1955 . . . 58.0%
2010 . . . 81.5%

Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time High

'corporate profits are at an all-time high as a percentage of the economy, wages are at an all-time low.'

'Last year, corporations made a record $824 billion, which didn’t stop conservatives from continually claiming that President Obama is anti-business.'
Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time High ThinkProgress

 

[Steinlight]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Dad2three]

Milton Keynes? lol

Yeah, it was the 'excess' of unions who had already been shrinking by the 1980's before Ronnie declared war on them!


NOT that it was the auto manufactures fault for resting on their laurels, lol


History has shown us that having more people able to afford the necessities of life IMPROVES the economy.

The period of greatest wage equality between workers and management was also the period where this nation boomed, seeing unparalleled growth for ALL classes (yes, even for the very rich). In fact, the rich did better under policies that they are crying about now then they do under so-called job-creator policies

John Keynes, it was a typo, it is interesting how you attack a typo considering your freakish post format with several typos and random caps. Anyways, the point stands,trying to connect criticism of American organized labor in the latter half of the 20th century to Keynes or Libertarianism is absurd. Union membership has been on the decline since the late 50s because workers have recognize their inherent corruption and inability to address their needs.
http://doughenwood.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/union-density1.jpg

Your defense of union corruption shows that you have no sense of history and have never held a job in an industry with union trades. I could refer you to anecdotal examples from myself in my friends in the construction trade, where union construction workers for example wouldn't move dry wall or wire upstairs because that was the movers job, so they would sit their all day and nothing would get done while we would wait for the mover. For example, with auto manufacturers, UAW didn't even allow companies to build different carlines in the same plant. That doesn't show up in salaries, but it does in higher costs. So it wasn't just about high union wages, it was about inefficiency and costs.

MORE right wing bullshit. Shocking

The guy attacking unions, who like ANYTHING has good and bad, is fine will Mittens paying 14% taxes on $20 million income right? But it's the guy making $50-$60 grand that's the problem, NOT the CEO's who BARGAINED with the unions, lol

UNIONS created the conditions for jobs to go overseas right? Those construction jobs? Bet you have them in China today right? lol

Instead of being envious of union benefits, more people should organize or join one. The waning of the middle class coincides with corporate and right-wing attacks on unions.

You are the only bullshitter, and clearly have never held a job affiliated with unions in any way, you are just a partisan hack. It is ideological hacks like you who destroyed the unions. Shifting them form organizations focused on workers interests to bloated bureaucracies based on liberal political ideology. One of the strongest examples of this is union leadership today supporting amnesty, despite middle class americans opposing it. And you wonder why no one wants a part of them? They don't represent their interests and put social liberalism before the interests of their members.

You equate everyone who points out union corruption in the US to a Romney supporter or a supporter of corporate excess. I oppose corporate and union corruption. With that attitude, it is no wonder union membership continues to decline. You can't conceive that a growing number of people are represented by either party, and are sick of Democrats and Republicans, particularly white working class people.

Unions certainly contributed. Honestly, you are so thick, I was giving a person example, along with the UAW example, to show union inefficiency. You have no response, so you create a strawman.

Talk about strawman, lol

Actually WAS union for 11 years Bubba, CWA...Yeah, it's 'union corruption'.lol

The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Than you are dishonest, if you can't recognize the corruption in unions, and thus their failure in retaining membership lies, I don't know what to tell you.

The same model has applied with unions. Wealth have been transferred from union members to union leadership. If you can't recognize that both unions and corporations have gone down the same path, than I don't know what to tell you.
Scores of union leaders earn six-figure salaries Center for Public Integrity

SIX FIGURE VERSUS 8 FIGURE. Hmmm


Unions are ONLY democracy in the workplace. Of cxourse I expect a wing nutter like you to hate it!


At its core, the Tea Party movement is rife with contradiction, incoherence and a willful contempt for facts or reason. It is but a parody of the legitimate movements for which American democracy has historically been held in such high regard. It is, in fact, the latest installment in quite another American tradition: the exploitation of frustrated, desperate, and susceptible people by monied interests and profiteers.


The Tea Party Movement Is a National Embarrassment Stuart Whatley

 

[Dad2three]

Milton Keynes? lol

Yeah, it was the 'excess' of unions who had already been shrinking by the 1980's before Ronnie declared war on them!


NOT that it was the auto manufactures fault for resting on their laurels, lol


History has shown us that having more people able to afford the necessities of life IMPROVES the economy.

The period of greatest wage equality between workers and management was also the period where this nation boomed, seeing unparalleled growth for ALL classes (yes, even for the very rich). In fact, the rich did better under policies that they are crying about now then they do under so-called job-creator policies

Union membership declined during the late 50s and 60s, when there was the greatest period of wage equality.

Yeah, when dummy's like you, figured there was no need for unions anymore, then your conservative 'think tanks' came in and wiped them out! Amazing how many vote against their own best interests, we see it all the time in the poor, uneducated south, voting GOP and not backing unions, the morons!

What, I thought Reagan destroyed unions, now it is dumb southerners fault? How come income rose through the 50s into the 70s when union membership declined?

Yes, there are no need for unions that are explicitly hostile to the American worker and support foreign labor.
SEIU - Service Employees International Union - immigration

These unions need to be liquidated and put in the control of patriotic Americans.

I get it Bubba, WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol

IF you were EVER honest and got off your Birch bullshit I might have a heart attack. Bet you think Uncle Walter was the reason the US lost in Vietnam too right? That gawdamn red right?

You admit they are primarily hispanic race based and wonder why Americans don't join them? Seriously? Why would any non-hispanic native born worker support a union that wants to bring in more immigrants just because they are hispanic?

Same with the AFL-CIO, both support amnesty. The AFL was originally a pro-American organization that opposed immigration to protect American jobs. Now they have sold out.
American Federation of Labor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Keep proving what a lying POS you are Bubba

THIS:

"WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol"

ISN'T THIS:


"You admit they are primarily hispanic race based"

DUMBASS!

 

[Dad2three]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

You didn't answer the question.

Sure I did. I can't help it if you are ignorant

 

[Wyatt earp]

Americans also believed in Gruber/Obama lie care so what's they point again?

That most Americans are to stupid to see that more people equals more competition for jobs, less social services to go around a bigger strain on schools?

 

[Steinlight]

Union membership declined during the late 50s and 60s, when there was the greatest period of wage equality.

Yeah, when dummy's like you, figured there was no need for unions anymore, then your conservative 'think tanks' came in and wiped them out! Amazing how many vote against their own best interests, we see it all the time in the poor, uneducated south, voting GOP and not backing unions, the morons!

What, I thought Reagan destroyed unions, now it is dumb southerners fault? How come income rose through the 50s into the 70s when union membership declined?

Yes, there are no need for unions that are explicitly hostile to the American worker and support foreign labor.
SEIU - Service Employees International Union - immigration

These unions need to be liquidated and put in the control of patriotic Americans.

I get it Bubba, WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol

IF you were EVER honest and got off your Birch bullshit I might have a heart attack. Bet you think Uncle Walter was the reason the US lost in Vietnam too right? That gawdamn red right?

You admit they are primarily hispanic race based and wonder why Americans don't join them? Seriously? Why would any non-hispanic native born worker support a union that wants to bring in more immigrants just because they are hispanic?

Same with the AFL-CIO, both support amnesty. The AFL was originally a pro-American organization that opposed immigration to protect American jobs. Now they have sold out.
American Federation of Labor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You mean unions support a path to citizenship? Shocking you Birchers hate it


Nov 20, 2014 - Breaking: Americans support a path to citizenship. About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

Not they don't. Half of Americans oppose Obama's executive Amnesty and citizenship to illegals.
Pew Poll Half of Americans Oppose Obama Exec Amnesty

However, none of this changes the fact that unons should support protecting their workers wages, regardless of political winds, and protect their interests.

 

[Steinlight]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

You didn't answer the question.

Sure I did. I can't help it if you are ignorant

No you didn't. You said Clinton was, "the best conservative prez". This means nothing. Do you support Clinton signing NAFTA or not? Stop being a coward and answer you mental midget.

 

[Dad2three]

And you want ME to agree that Clinton AND Dubya were at fault for the subprime bubble that happened under Dubya 'late 2004 extending into 2007' (according to Dubya's working group), BUT on NAFTA, Ronnie and Poppy are in the clear? lol


Will you EVER accept, for ANY reason that like the 1920', 1980's (S&L) AND 2000's it was CONSERVATIVES AND THEIR POLICIES AT FAULT? Was G/S 'repeal' as you call it, a 'neo liberal' or liberal position or one coming primarily from the GOPers and conservative side?

No one said, they were in the clear, whatever the hell that means. What I am saying, is the ultimate responsibility for NAFTA lies on Clinton as he signed it. What are you saying, NAFTA was ok for Clinton to sign because Reagan and Bush supported it as well? You aren't making a coherent argument.

Bush wasn't a conservative, and you don't understand what neo-liberalism is. It is an ideology that transcends party. Dont attack me because you are stupid and don't know what it is.
neoliberalism political and social science Encyclopedia Britannica

I get it Bubba, I just think it's strange you call Clinton a neo liberal, when Reagan AND BOTH BUSHES were.lol


I don't think you are stupid Bubba, dishonest and a POS, yes, stupid. Nah

They all were neo-liberals. But you still haven't explained. Is Clinton correct for supporting free trade because Bush and Reagan did? You still haven't explained this rationale.

IF you remember (AND HONEST) LIBERALS were against 'free trade', and like Iraq war (Dubya's war of choice), 60% of Dems in Congress have voted against EVERY 'free trade agreement since NAFTA!

Yes, BJ Bill was, BY FAR THE BEST conservative Prez since Ike.

EDIT. Looks like Obama will come in second place!

Free trade is a Liberal concept.
Economic liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Traditional Conservatives like Buchanan have opposed free trade and have done so since the days of Hamilton in our Burkean Conservative tradition.

A Democrat President signed it into law. 50% of Democrats voted for NAFTA in the Senate. 73% of Republicans in the Senate voted for it. 40% of Democrats in the House voted for it. 76% of Republicans in the House opposed it. This idea that 60% of Democrats in the Congress opposed it is false.

"This idea that 60% of Democrats in the Congress opposed it is false."

lol, Don't know there were less members of the Dems in the Senate huh and many more in the House?

H.R. 3450 (103rd): North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

Dems


Ay 102
No 156


NAFTA passed the Senate 61 to 38. Democrats were almost evenly split: 27 YEA, 26 NAY (and 1 not in attendance for the vote). Republicans voted for it by a larger margin: 34 YEA to 12 NAY.

312 TOTAL Dems in Congress

182 voted NO ON NAFTA, THAT'S 58%+ BUBBA!!! LOOK TO EVERY 'FREE TRADE' SINCE, 60%+ OF DEMS VOTED NO!!!

MAJORITY OF DEMS OPPOSED IT BUBBA! BY FAR!

WHAT WAS THE VOTES FROM THE GOPers? lol

 

[Dad2three]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

You didn't answer the question.

Sure I did. I can't help it if you are ignorant

No you didn't. You said Clinton was, "the best conservative prez". This means nothing. Do you support Clinton signing NAFTA or not? Stop being a coward and answer you mental midget.

I'm sorry you are a dense Bircher, but yes, I think BJ Bill was the best conservative Prez since Ike, as a liberal, I oppose conservatives,I hate bigots like you, and despise these libertarian ass wipes who, like you, believe in myth's and fairy tales!

 

[Siete]

What do liberals want the US to be?


I won't speak for liberals, but personally, I want you to be quiet. As in STFU,

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah, when dummy's like you, figured there was no need for unions anymore, then your conservative 'think tanks' came in and wiped them out! Amazing how many vote against their own best interests, we see it all the time in the poor, uneducated south, voting GOP and not backing unions, the morons!

What, I thought Reagan destroyed unions, now it is dumb southerners fault? How come income rose through the 50s into the 70s when union membership declined?

Yes, there are no need for unions that are explicitly hostile to the American worker and support foreign labor.
SEIU - Service Employees International Union - immigration

These unions need to be liquidated and put in the control of patriotic Americans.

I get it Bubba, WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol

IF you were EVER honest and got off your Birch bullshit I might have a heart attack. Bet you think Uncle Walter was the reason the US lost in Vietnam too right? That gawdamn red right?

You admit they are primarily hispanic race based and wonder why Americans don't join them? Seriously? Why would any non-hispanic native born worker support a union that wants to bring in more immigrants just because they are hispanic?

Same with the AFL-CIO, both support amnesty. The AFL was originally a pro-American organization that opposed immigration to protect American jobs. Now they have sold out.
American Federation of Labor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You mean unions support a path to citizenship? Shocking you Birchers hate it


Nov 20, 2014 - Breaking: Americans support a path to citizenship. About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

Not they don't. Half of Americans oppose Obama's executive Amnesty and citizenship to illegals.
Pew Poll Half of Americans Oppose Obama Exec Amnesty

However, none of this changes the fact that unons should support protecting their workers wages, regardless of political winds, and protect their interests.

Good for you Bubba, you don't take my posit, but instead make up your own and argue from there. Typical from you

Americans strongly support a path to citizenship.


About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, according to a new poll from NBC News and Wall Street Journal. And that number jumps to a whopping 74 percent if you qualify that the undocumented immigrants must take steps like paying back taxes.

The very same poll, though, also asked people whether they support legal status -- shy of citizenship -- for illegal immigrants. Support for this, somewhat amazingly, is just 39 percent, with 48 percent opposed.



In other words, huge majorities support a path to citizenship. But on a path to legal status, it's reversed.

Americans strongly support a path to citizenship. That means less for Obama than you think. - The Washington Post

 

[Steinlight]

You oppose Clinton signing NAFTA into law, you accept his responsibility for it?

Like I said, BJ Bill was the best consercvative Prez since Ike, Obama looks to come in second place, unless he's turned by the GOP the next 2 years, he might beat Clinton

You didn't answer the question.

Sure I did. I can't help it if you are ignorant

No you didn't. You said Clinton was, "the best conservative prez". This means nothing. Do you support Clinton signing NAFTA or not? Stop being a coward and answer you mental midget.

I'm sorry you are a dense Bircher, but yes, I think BJ Bill was the best conservative Prez since Ike, as a liberal, I oppose conservatives,I hate bigots like you, and despise these libertarian ass wipes who, like you, believe in myth's and fairy tales!

This still doesn't answer the question on whether you oppose Clinton signing NAFTA. You just said you oppose conservatives, view Clinton as a conservative, but view him as the best of the Conservatives. That is absurd state as Clinton is not conservative in any sense, certainly not with NAFTA, but you are avoiding the question because you won't condemn Clinton. So do you oppose Clinton on signing NAFTA?

Libertarianism is born of Classical Liberalism, not Burkean Conservatism. As is free trade. Conservatives have always opposed free trade, so stop falsely pegging this to us. Even as you admitted, Federalists, the heirs to conservatism in the US, instituted the American System, with tariffs.

 

[Steinlight]

What, I thought Reagan destroyed unions, now it is dumb southerners fault? How come income rose through the 50s into the 70s when union membership declined?

Yes, there are no need for unions that are explicitly hostile to the American worker and support foreign labor.
SEIU - Service Employees International Union - immigration

These unions need to be liquidated and put in the control of patriotic Americans.

I get it Bubba, WHY would a union with a heavy Hispanic membership support a path to citizenship when self deporting would work so well, lol

IF you were EVER honest and got off your Birch bullshit I might have a heart attack. Bet you think Uncle Walter was the reason the US lost in Vietnam too right? That gawdamn red right?

You admit they are primarily hispanic race based and wonder why Americans don't join them? Seriously? Why would any non-hispanic native born worker support a union that wants to bring in more immigrants just because they are hispanic?

Same with the AFL-CIO, both support amnesty. The AFL was originally a pro-American organization that opposed immigration to protect American jobs. Now they have sold out.
American Federation of Labor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You mean unions support a path to citizenship? Shocking you Birchers hate it


Nov 20, 2014 - Breaking: Americans support a path to citizenship. About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants

Not they don't. Half of Americans oppose Obama's executive Amnesty and citizenship to illegals.
Pew Poll Half of Americans Oppose Obama Exec Amnesty

However, none of this changes the fact that unons should support protecting their workers wages, regardless of political winds, and protect their interests.

Good for you Bubba, you don't take my posit, but instead make up your own and argue from there. Typical from you

Americans strongly support a path to citizenship.


About six in 10 support a new pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, according to a new poll from NBC News and Wall Street Journal. And that number jumps to a whopping 74 percent if you qualify that the undocumented immigrants must take steps like paying back taxes.

The very same poll, though, also asked people whether they support legal status -- shy of citizenship -- for illegal immigrants. Support for this, somewhat amazingly, is just 39 percent, with 48 percent opposed.



In other words, huge majorities support a path to citizenship. But on a path to legal status, it's reversed.

Americans strongly support a path to citizenship. That means less for Obama than you think. - The Washington Post

Amnesty is the path to citizenship. What both our polls shows is that it depends how the word the question. When they say a path to citizenship, as opposed to amnesty, since this is broad and can mean any number of things, it receives more support. When the poll says amnesty, Americans oppose it.

And this still doesn't address the point that unions shouldn't be based on polls, but on protecting their workers wages, which are threatened by immigration through increase labor supply. Simple economics.